to action; and so long as the right of acquisition is exercised in conformity to the social relations and the moral obligation which spring from them, it ought to be sacredly protected.

“The natural and active sense of property pervades the foundations of social improvement. It leads to the cultivation of the earth, the institution of government, the establishment of justice, the acquisition of the comforts of life, the growth of the useful arts, the spirit of commerce, the productions of taste, the erection of charities, and the display of the benevolent affections."***"A state of equality as to property is impossible to be maintained, for it is against the laws of our nature; and if it could be reduced to practice, it would place the human race in a state of tasteless enjoyment and stupid inactivity, which would degrade the mind and destroy the happiness of social life. Where the laws allow a free circulation to property by the abolition of perpetuities, entailments, the claims of primogeniture, and all inequalities of descent, the operation of the steady laws of nature will, of themselves, preserve a proper equilibrium, and dissipate the mounds of property as fast as they accumulate."

The difficulty is that the laws, as they now stand, fall short of accomplishing what they were designed to do, and what they once did sufficiently well. They are too slow to keep up with this time of invention, steam and lightning. They were well enough when it was of rare occurrence that a man accumulated a million dollars in a long business life; but now when the possibilities of amassing wealth are almost limitless; when one may, if he possesses the requisite skill and credit, control the markets of the civilized world, give personal and momentary direction to his widely separated agencies without moving from his desk, and amass millions in a single year, the conditions are altogether changed, and call for a corresponding change in the laws of property, such a change as will keep us in the way originally marked out as likely to produce the most happy results for all concerned.

The reasonable limits of this discussion will not permit of a mention of all the evils that may flow from the creation and maintenance of great estates in this country. The one consideration that is uppermost, is the safety of property itself. The relations of property to our social and political welfare are so intimate, and the laws that control them are so far reaching, that they demand the most careful scrutiny and the earliest attention. The happiness of our people and the perpetuity of our government are bound up in this question. The great question is, how may we put a stop to the growing animosity between labor and capital?

The committee did not in their recommendation favor such a change in the laws of inheritance as would affect the great majority of estates, but only those that are obnoxious to the spirit of our institutions, the "abnormally large fortunes." such as absorb and take out of circulation large blocks of wealth, giving to the possessors an undue prominence and influence in the affairs of the country and constituting conspicuous marks of envy and suspicion. It cannot be denied that the creation of these colossal fortunes is accompanied by a tendency to decrease the number of smaller ones and to greatly increase the number of those persons who have no property at all or who have so little that they take sides with those who have none. The absorption by a few dealers of all the business in their line, means the killing out of the small dealers, the decrease in the number of the employer and independent class and the increase of the employed and dependent class. How few men control the entire railroad system of this country, and what an immense power they possess and what facilities they have for increasing their wealth and power. They make the market in stocks to-day, and break it to-morrow; are every time the gainers, but over against these few gainers stand the great army of losers, not wiser, perhaps, but in a great deal fitter frame of mind to join the ranks of those that think things are some way out of joint. All this results in discontent, and the number of the discontented is steadily and rapidly increasing. We are not alone in our apprehensions. They are in the minds of all thinking men. No less a dignified and intelligent body than the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church, in their late convention, at Chicago, thought the subject worthy of the most prominent place in their pastoral letter. They say: "Under the conditions of modern civilization, new dangers spring from the inequalities of the social state, the increase of poverty, discontent and pride being as marked as the accumulations of fortunes and

the growth of luxury. How shall this discontent and misery be remedied; wealth recognize its stewardship; affluence own the brotherhood of man, and the less favored and successful be rendered cheerful and contented with their lot?"

That the church can do much by its teachings and its ministrations, there is no doubt, but it is for the State to correct the sources of this unhappy condition of things. The law is the express principle upon which the machinery of State works out the great results of organized society. As the principle is, so must the results be.

It is not pretended that what we propose is a cure-all, but it is a movement in the right direction. It pertains to the fundamental principles of our government. It will turn the tendency to aristocracy and classes to that of democracy and equality of opportunities in the struggle of life.

The first thought is that this measure is antagonistic to property rights; on the contrary it is to conserve them. Ours is a democracy in which majorities rule. Our policy has been and must continue to be to keep property in the majority, or, in other words, keep the majorities on the side of property. Let us contemplate for a moment the state of things that would come about, if those who are attributing all their miseries to the individual ownership of property, should suddenly find themselves in the majority at the polls. Their most sagacious leaders are already directing their attention to this point of attack, as far more likely of success, and infinitely safer to the agitator himself, than dynamite.

A leader among the non-property class speaking of this movement in Chicago,

says:

"We are already at work. Every labor organization in the city is now a political club. The first work to be done, is to whip the small shop and store keepers into line. There are the small grocers and dry goods stores, the butcher shops, fancy stores, saloons, shoe stores and a hundred and one other small dealers. These parties were not with us last fall. The strength of their vote is in the neighborhood of 20,000. A raid is to be made on them. They make a living out of the working class, and if they are to continue to do it, they will have to vote with the party that supports them. And I can tell you that these people will be shown that they cannot afford to say no. The great question in the political world now is Capital v. Labor. It is the only issue that can divide political parties. The issues that created the Democratic and Republican parties are dead. In less than ten years it will be the United Labor party and the United Capital party, and the question will be fought out on that line. Then will come the social revolution, I suppose. The world will be turned upside down, capital will be put under where it ought to be-made subservient to man, and not man subservient to capital, as is now the case. Yes, sir, the world has got to face this issue, and, as Chicago is the most radical place in the world, its most advanced point will always be located here."

That there is a strong movement in this direction, no careful observer can have failed to see. To return and move in the opposite direction while property owners are largely in the majority, may easily be done. It must be done by appealing to the selfinterest of the people, and not by running counter to it. This is a land of abundance. We profess that it is one of opportunities and incentives. Let us keep good this profession. By so doing we shall keep the majorities on the side of property, and the poison of the socialist, nihilist and anarchist doctrines will not take effect. Their animosity to individual and exclusive ownership of property and to laws for its protection grows out of the fact that they do not happen to be the individuals who own it, and envy of those who do. There is nothing in the doctrine of these men that has any root in the human affections. No man in his natural sympathies would be willing to put his earning in a common pot, to be doled out to him from a common crib, or to be driven to his daily toil by a common overseer-the practical outcome of socialism. It is as much an affection of the human heart to desire the exclusive possession and enjoyment of property as it is to love one's own offspring, for whose well-being he would gather it around him. It is envy of those who have property that lies at the bottom of all the socialistic and nihilistic talk, and not an unwillingness to enjoy its comforts. It is the talk of those who have nothing but want something, and would turn everything upside down to get it.

One

It reminds one of the case of the contention of the two women over the child. was the mother of the child and the other wanted it. The mother wanted it because it was her's, and her heart yearned for it. The other wanted it because she had none, and she coveted it; and so when Solomon proposed that it should be divided between them-which meant the destruction of its life and all pleasure it could be to either of them-and the mother in her anguish said, rather let her have it; she turned upon the mother and responded: "Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it." She was one of the earliest nihilists.

Contentment and safety lie in keeping good the promises of our free institutions, in giving to every man as nearly as may be an equal chance with every other man. The conviction is rapidly gaining ground among mechanics and laborers that the chances are not only equal but that they are growing more and more unequal; that capital has its own way, and labor has a hard time of it, and he must be blind indeed who does not see that there is much truth in what they say. In the nature of things it must always be more or less so under the best practicable conditions. The man who has gained a dollar is that much ahead of him who has his dollar to gain, and it is right it should be so. This gives incentive to higher skill and greater industry and frugality. It is in the nature of money to gain other money, to work for its owner, and when combined with skill in the direction of its energies, to increase in power as it increases in amount, and within reasonable limits this brings the best results for all concerned. An equal chance does not mean that all shall stop and divide and start anew, and keep stopping and dividing, as inequalities in acquisition arise, as they ever must. Nor does it mean that all shall receive equal pay for their labor. This would be to ignore all differences in skill and in natural ability and between him who has an established reputation and him who has a reputation to gain. Intelligent mechanics and laborers do not contend for this. What they ask and what they ought to be freely granted, is that wages shall be in proportion to services; that the relation between one's pay and the cost of living be not so close that there is no chance of getting ahead of the necessities of life; that there is a way open for advancement from the more simple and least paid employments to the more responsible and better paid; that by self-improvement and economy he may press his way up into the higher walks of life; that the employed may in turn become the employer. We cannot make good this bright promise to all; there will always be many that will not get ahead. Some from lack of natural ability of both body and mind; some on account of misfortune over which they have no control; others from unwillingness to meet the conditions of success; and still more-the victims of the vices. But we believe under a wise system of property law the number of the unsuccessful may be kept down to a small per cent, of the whole-far below the danger point.

The conjecture that a more general diffusion of property would seriously interfere with the carrying forward of great enterprises, has little in it. It is not difficult to concentrate capital wherever it will pay best. A far more difficult and important problem is how to prevent it from combining and crushing out all who are not admitted to the combination. If a more general diffusion of property would tend to a more general diffusion of enterprise, it would be a great point gained to the general welfare of the country-one of the strongest arguments that has been urged against perpetuities is that they take property out of circulation-get into dead hands, as the lawyers term it. It is not the experience of this country that the great enterprises have been originated and carried forward by men who have inherited great fortunes, but by men who have grown up to the magnitude of their conceptions through toil and preparation.

Whether such a limitation would have the effect to dampen the ardor of business to a hurtful extent would depend upon the reasonableness of the limitation itself. The settled law of a country has such an influence upon the customs, opinions and aspirations of the people that it is hard to tell beforehand what will be the ultimate effect of a great rule of property.

If, because one cannot leave to his children or other objects of his choice more than a certain amount, he will stop earlier in his career of money-making and take some good of it himself, it is not at all certain that the country will on the whole be the worse for it. His retirement will most likely open up opportunities for others, quite as worthy, and who will carry forward his enterprises with quite as good results as he might have

done. But it is doubtful if the question of who will inherit the property has much influence upon the question of making it, unless it is forced upon the attention by the sudden removal of a cherished object. Some of the most eminent cases of great accumulations have been by men who had no kin upon whom they could bestow it. The habit of money making, the pleasure of possession, the power and distinction which wealth gives, and the pride which it stimilates, have each and all proved sufficient to postpone the time of bringing a successful career to a close. The pride to build up great estates and found a great family (a pride that is more often disappointed than realized) would no doubt have to be relinquished in a great measure. Perhaps it would be replaced by endeavors more thoroughly to fit those who are coming on for greater usefulness and success. It will no doubt have the effect to widen the range of sympathies among kindred as primogeniture has the effect to narrow them. We very naturally interest ourselves in those whom the law recognizes as entitled to share in our gains when we shall have done with them, and they quite as naturally return the solicitude,

JANUARY 11, 1887.

HARVEY B. HURD,
JAMES A. CONNOLLY,

On motion of Mr. Bonney, the thanks of the Association were extended and a copy requested for publication, but discussion of the same postponed .to Wednesday, January 12, 1887, the second day of the Association.

On motion of Mr. Bonney, the following papers, prepared and read by him, were referred to the Committee on Law Reform

:

A BILL FOR AN ACT TO ESTABLISH A LAW REFORM COMMISSION. SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, represented in the General Assembly: That to provide a suitable means for dealing with the existing delay, uncertainty, inadequacy and expense of legal proceedings, a Law Reform Commission of this State is hereby established. Said Commission shall consist of three members, who shall be appointed and commissioned by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate; and shall take the oath of office prescribed by the constitution; and shall hold office for a like term, and receive the like pay as judges of the Supreme Court of this State. The contingent expenses of said Commission shall be allowed by the Governor, and paid out of the contingent fund of the executive department.

SECTION 2. It shall be the duty of said Law Reform Commission to examine, from time to time, the decisions of the Appellate and Supreme Courts of this State, and to note, as may be disclosed thereby, or otherwise, any defects in, or omissions from the laws of this State; and the causes of any such delay, uncertainty, inadequacy or expense; and thereupon to consider the same, and prepare bills for the remedy thereof, so far as may seem practicable, with a brief statement of the reasons in support of such bills, respectively. Said bills shall be reported to the Governor, and he shall transmit the same to the General Assembly, with his recommendations, if any.

POINTS IN SUPPORT OF THE FOREGOING BILL.

1. The evils which the bill aims to remedy, are almost universally admitted. There can be no serious debate on the question of their existence. That fact admitted, it must be an imperative duty to deal with them in a practical way, and provide some adequate means for their removal.

Under existing circumstances, legal remedies are practically worthless to the poor and friendless; and suitors who are able to bear the delays, expenses and uncertainties which legal proceedings commonly involve, find that in many cases the actual results are not worth what they have cost. So the poor shun the courts because they

cannot afford the luxury of justice; and others avoid them, so far as practicable, because almost any settlement of a controversy yields better practical results than a course of litigation. The cases now brought are, for the most part, such as cannot be settled, or such as drift into the courts in a sort of matter-of-course way, for want of any better mode of determining them.

2. Justice, remedial justice, can never be satisfactory to the people, unless it be speedy and inexpensive. Litigation is not, and should not be permitted to become a private business. All the people are, and ought to be deeply concerned in securing justice to all, especially to those who are unable to protect themselves. When government forbids the members of a community to settle their conflicts of interest or feeling by physical strife or retaliation, it necessarily assumes the duty of providing adequate means of speedily determining all proper controversies, in impartial tribunals, and giving a practical and efficient redress of grievances.

3. The general cause of the evils we deplore, is the fact that judicial remedies and means of administration, have not kept pace with the enormous advance in population and business, wealth and power. Our judicial force is much too small, and not properly compensated. The entire expenses of the judicial department of the government, State and National alike, are absurdly small, in comparison with the aggregate annual expenditures for governmental purposes. The laws are made with undue haste, and without proper revision; and are administered by very inadequate executive, as well as judicial forces.

The proposed Law Reform Commission would take charge, as a matter of business and duty, of subjects of transcendent importance to the whole people, but which are now notoriously neglected. It may be said that it is now the duty of the Governor, the Legislature, and the Courts, to deal with all such subjects. Granted: but the maxim remains true that what is everybody's business, will surely be neglected as nobody's business, and so the neglect will continue till some specific agency is provided to perform the neglected duties.

4. The expense of such a commission would be of no moment in comparison with the benefits it should accomplish. But if it were otherwise, the State of Illinois is too rich and powerful to let a needed service go unperformed, because it cannot obtain the service gratuitously. Illinois is able to pay for any service that will benefit the people. C. C. BONNEY.

CHICAGO, January 10, 1887.

A PROPOSED LEGAL REMEDY FOR CONFLICTS OF LABOR AND CAPITAL.

A BILL FOR AN ACT TO ESTABLISH A STATE BOARD OF LABOR AND CAPITAL. SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, represented in the General Assembly: That within ten days next after the date on which this act shall be in force and effect, the Governor, subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint and commission five persons, who shall constitute a Board of Commissioners and officers of this State, and shall be called and known as the "Illinois State Board of Labor and Capital." The first person so appointed, shall be commissioned to hold his office for the term of one year, the second for two years, the third for three years, the fourth for four years, and the fifth for five years, and all shall further hold the same till their respective successors shall have been appointed, and shall be ready to enter upon the duties of the office. And thereafter, all persons appointed as members of said Board, shall be commissioned to hold office for the term of five years from their appointment, except that whenever a vacancy shall occur in said Board, by reason of death, removal, resignation, neglect of duty, or other cause, the Governor shall fill the same by an appointment and commission for the unexpired part of the term, subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, if then in session, or as soon as they shall be so, and act upon the matter. The Governor shall be the sole judge of the fact whether a